The Lady's Silence

Last night I watched The Lady, a film documenting the rise of Aung San Suu Kyi from Oxford housewife to Burmese freedom fighter. It’s difficult not to be touched by the passion, bravery and sacrifice she shows for the Burmese people, who suffered not only the indignity of over a century of British colonial rule, but also decades of brutal military dictatorship, which continues to this day. The actions of Suu Kyi have resulted in millions of Burmese looking to the future with hope, rather than trepidation. However, her silence in recent years in relation to the Rohingya situation in the country’s north has left me perplexed.

In her youth, Suu Kyi left Burma to study in the UK, and while at college met her husband, Michael Aris. They settled in Oxford and lived a comfortable life, but everything changed in 1988 when Suu Kyi visited her dying mother in Burma and discovered her political calling. This period saw the first tentative steps forward for The National League for Democracy, with Suu Kyi flexing her leadership muscles, while molding her philosophy of non-violent political change. Many influential meetings ironically took place in the family home, the very place where her father dreamed of a free Burma half a century before.

Suu Kyi's father, Aung San, played a pivotal role in securing independence from the British, but his assassination just six months before the historic handover meant the father of modern Burma never tasted the sweetness of political autonomy.  Suu Kyi followed in her father's footsteps and attempted to instill dignity and belief into a wounded people, stoking the fire of hope within the nation's heart. 

In the eyes of the Burmese people, Suu Kyi overflows with goodness, and her persona, which is gentle but firm, is a potent catalyst for change.  She represents a flame of hope burning brightly in the face of governmental cronyism and ineptitude. This manifested itself in her landslide victory in the 1990 election, the first democratic election since 1960. However, her win was anathema to the military elite who laughed in the face of the country's collective will and placed Suu Kyi under house arrest, where she remained for the next fifteen years. At the same time, influential members of the National League of Democracy languished indefinitely in Burma’s jails. Their only crime was instigating change in a land where misrule had robbed generations of a future.

There is little doubt that The Lady, as Suu Kyi is affectionately known in Burma, acted with drive and forethought, attempting to fulfill her father's destiny and propel Burma forward towards a better future; however, in the wake of her dominance of Burmese politics, her failure to speak out about the plight of the Rohingya Muslims in the countries north east has tarnished the image of the Nobel peace laureate. 

In recent years, Rakhine state in Northern Burma has been rocked by ethnic violence between Buddhists and Muslims. The severity of the situation, combined with the fact that many Muslim monks are hiking up tension with incendiary comments, led me to consider a number of questions:

Why is this upholder of the good, this embodiment of compassion not saying more?

Suu Kyi's silence strikes a chord of unease in the heart of human rights activists, many of whom are beginning to question her motives.

Is she being politically expedient?

Perhaps Suu Kyi is widely tipped to win the 2015 election and become the leader of the country; thus, a show of support for the Rohingya could infuriate Buddhist voters, who in turn might punish her at the ballot box.  

In June, 2013, Suu Kyi broke her public silence on the Rohingya issue when she condemned the government’s two-child policy, which puts a cap on the number of Rohingya offspring per family. The junta state overpopulation as justification for the policy; however, it’s a Muslim only policy and doesn’t apply to the country’s 90% Buddhist majority.

Who knows what the future holds for Burma, The Lady, or the embattled Rohingya minority. Memories of what happened in Ruanda are still vivid in the minds of international observers, and to prevent the unspeakable happening, Suu Kyi might have to speak out more often to prevent a catastrophe.

Thailand's Vocational Students

For the last three decades, a whirlwind of violence has swept through Thailand’s vocational schools, colleges infamous for breeding teenage gangs who fight for the perceived honour of their institution. The indiscriminate nature of the teen savagery has been well documented in the Thai media; however, little has been done to prevent the escalation of the conflict. So what drives the youngsters to commit such heinous crimes? Who is to blame? And most importantly, what is being done to stop it? The truth is that no one really knows, and the authorities have been grappling with these issues for decades. In this blog, I am going to attempt to unravel some of these issues and shed some light on a cultural black spot that, up to this very day, shows no sign of reaching a peaceful resolution.

By the end of May this year, there had been 385 inter-school clashes on the street of Bangkok. Of these, 165 happened between 3pm and 6pm (http://www.bangkokpost.com/breakingnews/295451/385-school-brawls-so-far-this-year). Statistics like this, severe as they are, are likely to cloak the true nature of the epidemic which is spiraling dangerously out of control, not only of the capital streets, but also in the provinces. I have personal experience of one such attack in Phuket, an island famed for its pearly white sands. On one particular evening, I witnessed a group of 10/15 teenagers being set upon by a student wielding a baseball bat. In the fracas, a member of the group pulled out a gun and attempted to shoot the attacker in the head. He missed and smashed a window only metres from where we were sitting. Incidents like these are commonplace on the streets of a country that is losing its grip on teen violence. In June, students opened fire on a public bus in Bangkok killing two innocent people (http://www.bangkokpost.com/learning/easier-stuff/298164/student-violence-leaves-two-dead). Moreover, in July an armed motorcycle chase left three students dead and another three critically injured in Kalasin, causing a public outcry (http://www.bangkokpost.com/news/local/301820/three-killed-three-hurt-in-student-shooting). However, critically, there have been few policy initiatives to curb the culture of ultra-violence which threatens to boil over at the commencement of each school day. The authorities appear to be treading water on an issue that needs urgent attention.

In the fuzzy aftermath of any atrocity, there is always one question that has an unparalleled position of importance in the discourse – “why?” The media are always on the scene to present distraught mothers, hysterical fathers and deflated friends who all splutter the same words into the camera, perplexed as to the reasoning behind yet another senseless death. Adults remain baffled by the reasoning used to condone acts of extreme violence by students and their peers. Most often institutional honour is stated to be the causal factor behind the violence. This assertion is weak as the very idea of being proud in attending a vocational college is a cultural improbability. Thais, as a people, take hierarchy very seriously indeed, and it is measured, on the whole, by one determining factor: wealth. Of course there are some regional differences, but on the whole, this is how an individual’s position on the social ladder is brought about. Furthermore, this societal pecking order is far from fluid. If you are born poor, poor is what you are and will be. Notions of social mobility are not part of the Thai psyhe, and if they were, they would be swiftly blocked by those in positions of power, managers, politicians etc. Throughout the day people assert their authority with their social position firmly in mind. It is the determining factor in how Thais interact with those around them. Thus, in Thailand you have two distinct sets of youngsters: those with money, who attend university and get a theoretical education; and those who attend vocational college and learn a trade. The schism between these two worlds is deep. Adhering to the laws of hierarchy, the university students, and society at large, view the technical students with quiet distain. They are swept under the carpet, hidden away from the watchful eyes of the Thai media, where game shows and soap operas perpetuate a myth of university as the Promised Land; those who fail to adorn the famous black and white (university) uniforms are looked at with varying degrees of disrespect. This dividing up of the countries youth foreshadows their future. Those wearing dark blue (vocational) know their place within a society that has already branded them as failures. Obviously, in a county where face is of the utmost importance, this creates an explosive inferiority complex. Being told at the age of sixteen that you have to attend a vocational institution causes not only the individual, but also their nearest and dearest, a huge drop in status. As a result, it is contested that this cultural perception causes a bubbling resentment in the heart of technical students around the country; however, this seething anger is turned inwards upon the only section of society they can relate to: their vocational peer group. Why do they not fight the university students who belittle them in open conversation, you may ask? The reason for this is simple. Culture does not permit it. Thais inherent sense of their place within society is so deeply ingrained that they rarely, in my experience, transgress the rules of the game. Therefore, due to a complex set of rules and procedures dictated by culture, vocational college students turn on each other in ritualistic outpourings of frustration, causing death, social unrest and ironically, promoting themselves in exactly the same light as to solidify their lowly position within the social hierarchy.

In the past twelve months the Thai government has set up military style boot camps for the most violent vocational college students (http://www.thaivisa.com/forum/topic/581831-thailand-grapples-with-killer-student-gangs/). While at the boot camp, individuals undergo physical training and military discipline in an attempt to reform their character and show them the errors of their ways. This is a positive pro-active step in the right direction for a country that is on the whole reactive in nature; however, for it to become more than a media sound bite, long term governmental financial commitment is a must. This remains to be seen. Aside from this policy little else has been done to alleviate the chaos.

The above questions have never been answered and probably never will be, but in an attempt to highlight the issue, I have thrown in my views, however erroneous they may be, for the sake of pushing discourse forward in a country where opinions often fall on deaf ears. There is no doubt that something needs to change in Thailand. Violence of this ferocity can’t be allowed to perpetuate. But with government policy only scraping the surface, this is a thirty year conflict that is here to stay.

Burma VJ (2009)

Burma VJ (2009)

Armed with pocket-sized video cameras, a tenacious band of Burmese reporters face down death to expose the repressive regime controlling their country. In 2007, after decades of self-imposed silence, Burma became headline news across the globe when peaceful Buddhist monks led a massive rebellion. More than 100,000 people took to the streets protesting a cruel dictatorship that has held the country hostage for more than 40 years. Foreign news crews were banned, the Internet was shut down, and Burma was closed to the outside world. So how did we witness these events? Enter the Democratic Voice of Burma (DVB), aka the Burma VJs. Compiled from the shaky handheld footage of the DVB, acclaimed filmmaker Anders Ostergaard’s Burma VJ pulls us into the heat of the moment as the VJs themselves become the target of the Burmese government. Their tactical leader, code-named Joshua, oversees operations from a safe hiding place in Thailand. Via clandestine phone calls, Joshua dispenses his posse of video warriors, who covertly film the abuses in their country, then smuggle their footage across the border into Thailand. Joshua ships the footage to Norway, where it is broadcast back to Burma and the world via satellite. Burma VJ plays like a thriller, all the more scary because it is true.

Torrent (Swedish Subtitles)


English RS Links

http://rapidshare.com/files/351152479/Burma.VJ.2008.LIMITED.DVDRip.XviD-SUBMERGE.part1.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/351164534/Burma.VJ.2008.LIMITED.DVDRip.XviD-SUBMERGE.part2.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/351177217/Burma.VJ.2008.LIMITED.DVDRip.XviD-SUBMERGE.part3.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/351188483/Burma.VJ.2008.LIMITED.DVDRip.XviD-SUBMERGE.part4.rar
http://rapidshare.com/files/351191703/Burma.VJ.2008.LIMITED.DVDRip.XviD-SUBMERGE.part5.rar

Courtesy of Socially Responsible Films

BANGKOK - THURDAY 18TH MARCH

The United Front for Democracy Against Dictatorship’s offensive on Thailand’s capital Bangkok looks to be entering it’s twilight hours as thousands of supporters make their way home, weather beaten and hungry.

Paradoxically, security levels have been beefed up in response to alleged CIA intelligence concerning a ‘hardcore’ element within the movement bend on stirring violent unrest. Security authorities in Bangkok claim to have cause for concern as possible acts of ‘sabotage’ are planned around the city. The U.S government vehemently denies these claims. Deputy Prime Minister Southep Thughuban commented yesterday stating, ‘If these attacks take place it would have a devastating impact.’

Numbers at the protest have fallen from a peak of around 100,000 on Sunday, to about 15,000 yesterday morning according to Bangkok Post estimates. The UDD leadership acknowledged the dwindling numbers but remain defiant saying fresh reinforcements will soon arrive from other provinces. Ousted Prime Minister Thaskin Sinnawatra called for all within the movement to keep up the pressure on the government: ‘We have to maintain our strength” he said via video link yesterday. Reports say he is presently in Montenegro. Despite this hard talk, investigators on the ground said that the majority of red shirts would be on their home by Friday.

Yesterday Prime Minister Abhisit reiterated his wish to hold talks with the UDD leadership to discuss the situation, although he refuses outright to dissolve Thailand’s lower parliament.

Mike

BANGKOK, THAILAND - MARCH 16:

BANGKOK, THAILAND - MARCH 16:

Picture 1: Red-shirted supporters of ousted prime minister Thaksin Shinawatra (one of them wearing a mask of the man himself) shout slogans.

Picture 2: A supporter of deposed Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra holds a syringe full of blood after making a donation at protest site on March 16, 2010 in Bangkok, Thailand. Protesters are donating blood with the intention of collecting one million cubic centimeters of blood to be thrown in demonstrations outside Government House, as the government of Prime Minister Abhisit Vejjajiva continues to reject calls for a dissolution of the House and a fresh election.

Picture 3: The streets outside the 11th infantry battalion barracks and at other protest sites in Bangkok remain full, although some reports on the ground say that, on day three of the protests, numbers are beginning to dwindle.

Whose Blood do The Red Shirts Have on Their Hands? - Their Own of Course

All morning specially set up blood donation points have been extracting claret from the arms of red shirt protesters in central Bangkok Thousands are queuing to have their vein spiked in the name of democracy. The blood will be thrown around the entrances to government buildings at 3pm this afternoon, in a symbolic act akin to scene from a Sam Raimi movie.

The political significance of this move has to be questioned. Yes I agree, a point is being made, but with the clock ticking and peoples’ patience on both sides wavering, could efforts be used more effectively to achieve the movement’s main aim? – Dissolution of the lower parliament resulting in subsequent snap election.

The last few days have seen the red shirts frustrations grow with Prime Minister Abhisit brushing away their ultimatum with typical Ox-Bridge nonchalance. The message is clear: this government is not for budging.

Aside from the obvious health risks associated with throwing blood around in central Bangkok (in a country with a high aids rate), one has to wonder what tangible political gains will result from all this mayhem?

This sadomasochistic act certainly is a graphic and original show of defiance, but its measurable political impact remains to be seen. After all, Prime Minsiter Abhisit’s government is highly unlikely to change their mind and dissolve the parliament as a result.

The balance of power seems to be slipping away from a red movement that is visibly running out of steam and resorting to seemingly more desperate measures to bolster their campaign.

Fellow Thai blogger Somtow Sucharitkul summed up the situation perfectly with this masterstroke of close reasoning. ‘I suppose that the red shirts' other measures, such as breaking a pot in front of the statue of King Taksin, calling down a curse on the government, throwing plastic bags of rotten fish, and having the ex-PM descend through the airwaves from a place variously described as Germany, Cambodia, and Montenegro, have not worked. They were all very imaginative methods of bringing about political change, but when you have the all the resources of witchcraft and the supernatural at your disposal, why stoop to such mundane devices as, for instance, lobbying one of the smaller parties to switch sides so as to shift the balance of power?’

The question is how much longer is the collective ‘jai yen yen’(Thai phrase – ‘Have a cool heart.’) going to last before all hell breaks loose, and the streets of Bangkok are once again dripping with blood – this time non-consensually.

Mike

Bangkok Dangerous - Maybe Not After All.

It seems that the sea of red expected in Bangkok is more of a medium size estuary. Having said that, tributaries are still flowing steadily from the source, and by tonight who knows how grand the spectacle will be. On Friday red shirt officials had expected 1,000,000 protesters to fill the capital’s streets, but presently, this looks highly unlikely. More realistic estimates lie around the 200,000 mark; sizable, yes; capable of forcing the dissolution of the lower parliament, I think not.

What could be the reason for this massive underestimation of people power? It could be the reduction in ‘expenses’ paid to the movement for travel costs. As in any country political influence does not come without considerable expense; Thailand is no exception. A handful of cash, a red t-shirt, and a plastic clapper can arguably buy you a political activist for the day, with whole villages seemingly reveling a collective sense of purpose.

From a Western perspective this practice is questionable, but with the majority of the reds shirts support coming from the abstractly poor North East, it can be excused. This is political expediency Thai Style.

The movement’s grievances have been exacerbated in the last two years by a government that has openly questioned the reds intellectual prowess, and thus, political credibility. Crass arrogance such as this is a major issue in a county where face, or the loss of it, is everything. But, as an objective observer it takes some effort to swerve around this cash for protest politics.

Somtow Sucharitkul, an noteworthy Thai blogger based in Bangkok (http://www.somtow.org/) has this to say: ‘What I am sure about it that my housekeeper told me that according to her sources upcountry the fee for protesting is 500 baht, minus 300 which must be paid to an agent. The newspapers printed that it was 1,500 and that people were objecting to how little money they were getting to protest compared to last time. If it's 500 a day for 3 days, I guess the figures match. My housekeeper said, "My village isn't coming to the protests. They're not getting enough money, and last time it was too hot and it wasn't what we were expecting.’

What ever your opinion a fine line exists between poverty and political exploitation, especially when an aggressive propaganda machine promises imminent wealth to those adorned with a red t-shirt. It would be too cynical to doubt red shirt sincerity entirely, but in the developing world a little money can go a long way.

Mike

Colourful Times in Thailand

September 19, 2006 feels like only yesterday. I was coerced out of a bar in Bangkok’s Sukhumvit district by menacing men dressed in kaki, declaring Marshall Law from loud speakers, as Vaxhall Tanks rolled insidiously down the road in front of me. On this day, Thailand’s Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra was ousted from government, and sent packing to a life lived outside Thai borders. Thankfully I made it back to my bedsit unharmed that evening, albeit with the odious sent of violence in the air and a feeling in my stomach, that to this day, I can’t quite put into words. That day in October the ‘yellow shirts’ over threw the government, and ushered in the new age of colour politics.

Today, the dark undercurrents of political violence are threatening again, casting up reminiscent shadows that are all too familiar. A mass anti-government demonstration is to be held in Thailand’s capital at the weekend, and with Thailand’s record of violence at such events, the situation has the potential to explode.

The demonstration at the weekend is being held by the UDD.

Clad in red t-shirts, the UDD movement (The National United Front of Democracy Against Dictatorship), support the former prime Thaksin Shinawatra. (Bizarrely involved in Cambodian policy making at present)

The ‘red shirts’ as they are colloquially know, have a highly organized (and financed) grassroots movement based mainly in the heavily populated north east of the country. They are a self-styled party of the poor, and claim to have purer democratic intentions that the current government. The movement denounces Prime Minister Abhisit (leader of the Democratic Party), claming he and his party took power 'illegitimately', backed by the Thai army and bureaucrats. It calls for the Thai Parliament to be dissolved and a general re-election to be held. The ‘reds’ speak openly about their non-violent nature of their activities and discourse, and have a highly active propaganda machine; including a television station that pumps out the party message on a loop. Daily, I walk past road-side houses which have large televisions, hooked up to bass bins; in front a sea of red shirts sit crossed legged, drinking whisky, eating snacks, glued to the images ahead.

An armchair analysis of the situation will conclude that the ‘reds’ still lack vital inspirational/visionary leadership. They lack charisma at the top, and this could prove to be their undoing. The era of Thaksin as a tangible political force within the democratic system is undoubtedly over; and, if the ‘reds’ are going to advance within a democratic framework, they need to solve this problem. It seems clear that the way forward for the UDD, is to compact their deep and far reaching support base, and form into an independent labour party. This way they would have a clear vision, instead as acting as the ‘hired hands of a corrupt politician,’ as one writer succinctly put it in the Bangkok Post this week.

After examining the UDD’s six party principles, there is little that any Thai would disagree with: establishing a true democracy with HM the King as head if state; overthrowing the bureaucratic system; acting in a strictly non-violent manner; establishing justice and the rule of law; improving the economic well-being of all people; and bring back the 1997 constitution.


It can be stated unequivocally, that the ‘reds’ have not only a democratic right to protest, but a good reason for voicing their grievances in the current political climate. In recent times, leaving aside last months liquidation of 1.2 Billion Dollars worth of Thaksin’s assets by the central government, there have been a number of economic blunders that deserve a more attention than a raised eyebrow: For instance, the GT200 bomb detectors, bought from a British company last year, have been proven ineffective in finding explosives in Thailand’s war-torn southern regions. Prime Minister Abhisit has spoken out against this purchase by the military, criticizing the top-brass, referring to the GT200’s as ‘useless.’ But, even in the face of scientific fact, and ministerial abhorrence, Army commander-in-chief Anupong Paojinda is defiant. Contrast this situation with the 350 million Baht ‘Sky Dragon’, the world first counter-insurgency blimp. The military are now in doubt to whether it is capable of flight. These two issues have compounded anti-government sentiment.

These issues have caused embarrassment in full view front of the medias watchful eye, but worryingly for Thailand, there have been many other such crippling misadventures with the public wallet.

Two wasteful episodes on their own are worth shouting about, and provide the ‘reds’ with a legitimate focus outside the arena of Thaskin worship. The ‘red’ leaders have called for justice on these issues, stating that those responsible should be brought to account, and righty so.

This situation leads me to some contradictions concerning the ‘red’ movement and their fight:

In their six party principles the UDD state firmly that they want justice and a rule of law, yet call the judicial system bias in the recent Thaskin liquidation case even though it previously acquitted Thaskin himself, his ex-wife, and five of Thaksin’s cabinet ministers on another charge Now, these don’t sounds like pre-determined judgments considering the seriousness of the latter changers and the equital that followed. Surely any bias system would have brought the heavy hand of the law down hard at this stage of the proceedings? Is the ‘red’ movement interested in true democratic justice, or some kind diluted ‘red’ justice.

Also, stated in the UDD’s six party principles was the avocation of non-violence. Now, one only has to cast one’s mind back to last years Asean Summit in Pattaya when a sea of red shirts attacked Prime Minister Abhisit’s car at the interior ministry. This stands in stark contrast to the movement’s claims to non-violence. And, with the fiery rhetoric being lambasted from the ‘reds’ leadership over the last few months, few would be surprised if events at the weekend turned sour.

The events in Bangkok at the weekend will be watches closely by many around there world. It is sincerely hoped that violence will not spoil the political aspirations of a movement that has built up a legitimate voice in Thailand, and has a realistic future within a democratic framework.


Mike

President O Bama Recieves the Nobel Peace Prize

Lets have a little glance at what he has been up to since coming to office.

1. Climate change regulation – India and China gave him a thumbs down and are still building coal fired plants.

2. Guantanamo bay – He asked it to be closed by February 2010, will not be done.

3. Health care reform – the opposition to that bill in the house and senate is mind numbing

4. Reduce nuclear weapons – Iran and North Korea want nuclear weapons. India, China and Israel won’t sign nuclear non-proliferation treaty.

5. Afghanistan – in his campaign he said he will bring the fight against terrorism hard to Al Qaeda, but now he has second thoughts about troop increase.

6. Job losses – Said job losses will not be above 9%, currently in the USA that figure stands at 9.8% with no end in sight.

7. Israel-Palestine conflict – Israel won’t stop building settlements and Hamas criticized that Obama received the noble peace prize.

8. Iran – USA wants sanctions, but co-operation from China and Russia is lukewarm to say the least.

9. Honduras – Wants the ousted president reinstated, no one is listening.

Does the power of rhetoric really count for more than real political achievements?

This remind me of a satirical joke.

The writers of the theonion.com could not have written this one any better.

Food for thought.

Mike

Telling the Truth About the Armenian Genocide

We must resist Turkish pressure to distort history.

Fighting Words

By Christopher Hitchens


Even before President Barack Obama set off on his visit to Turkey this week, there were the usual voices urging him to dilute the principled position that he has so far taken on the Armenian genocide. April is the month in which the Armenian diaspora commemorates the bloody initiation, in 1915, of the Ottoman Empire's campaign to erase its Armenian population. The marking of the occasion takes two forms: Armenian Remembrance Day, on April 24, and the annual attempt to persuade Congress to name that day as one that abandons weasel wording and officially calls the episode by its right name, which is the word I used above.

Genocide had not been coined in 1915, but the U.S. ambassador in Constantinople, Henry Morgenthau, employed a term that was in some ways more graphic. In his urgent reports to the State Department, conveying on-the-spot dispatches from his consuls, especially in the provinces of Van and Harput, he described the systematic slaughter of the Armenians as "race murder." A vast archive of evidence exists to support this claim. But every year, the deniers and euphemists set to work again, and there are usually enough military-industrial votes to tip the scale in favor of our Turkish client. (Of late, Turkey's opportunist military alliance with Israel has also been good for a few shame-faced Jewish votes as well.)

President Obama comes to this issue with an unusually clear and unambivalent record. In 2006, for example, the U.S. ambassador to Armenia, John Evans, was recalled for employing the word genocide. Then-Sen. Obama wrote a letter of complaint to then-Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, deploring the State Department's cowardice and roundly stating that the occurrence of the Armenian genocide in 1915 "is not an allegation, a personal opinion, or a point of view, but rather a widely documented fact supported by an overwhelming body of historical evidence." On the campaign trail last year, he amplified this position, saying that "America deserves a leader who speaks truthfully about the Armenian genocide and responds forcefully to all genocides. I intend to be that president."

For any who might entertain doubt on this score, I would recommend two recent books of exceptional interest and scholarship that both add a good deal of depth and texture to this drama. The first is Armenian Golgotha: A Memoir of the Armenian Genocide, by Grigoris Balakian, and the second is Rebel Land: Travels Among Turkey's Forgotten Peoples, a contemporary account by Christopher de Bellaigue. In addition, we have just learned of shattering corroborative evidence from within the archives of the Turkish state. The Ottoman politician who began the campaign of deportation and extermination, Talat Pasha, left enormous documentation behind him. His family has now given the papers to a Turkish author named Murat Bardakci, who has published a book with the somewhat dry title The Remaining Documents of Talat Pasha. One of these "remaining documents" is a cold estimate that during the years 1915 and 1916 alone, a total of 972,000 Armenians simply vanished from the officially kept records of population. (See Sabrina Tavernise's report in the New York Times of March 8, 2009.)

There are those who try to say that the Armenian catastrophe was a regrettable byproduct of the fog of war and of imperial collapse, and this might be partly true of the many more Armenians who were slaughtered at the war's end and after the implosion of Ottomanism. But this is an archive maintained by the government of the day and its chief anti-Armenian politician, and it records in the very early days of World War I a population decline from 1,256,000 to 284,157. It is very seldom that a regime in its private correspondence confirms almost to an exactitude the claims of its victims.

So what will the deniers say now? The usual routine has been to insinuate that if Congress votes to assert the historic truth, then Turkey will inconvenience the NATO alliance by making trouble on the Iraqi border, denying the use of bases to the U.S. Air Force, or in other unspecified ways. This same kind of unchecked arrogance was on view at the NATO summit last weekend, where the Ankara government had the nerve to try to hold up the appointment of a serious Danish politician, Anders Rasmussen, as the next secretary-general of the alliance, on the grounds that as Denmark's prime minister he had refused to censor Danish newspapers to Muslim satisfaction! It is now being hinted that if either President Obama or the Congress goes ahead with the endorsement of the genocide resolution, Turkey will prove uncooperative on a range of issues, including the normalization of the frontier between Turkey and Armenia and the transit of oil and gas pipelines across the Caucasus.

When the question is phrased in this thuggish way, it can be slyly suggested that Armenia's own best interests are served by joining in the agreement to muddy and distort its own history. Yet how could any state, or any people, agree to abolish their pride and dignity in this way? And the question is not only for Armenians, who are economically hard-pressed by the Turkish closure of the common border. It is for the Turks, whose bravest cultural spokesmen and writers take genuine risks to break the taboo on discussion of the Armenian question. And it is also for Americans, who, having elected a supposedly brave new president, are being told that he—and our Congress too—must agree to collude in a gigantic historical lie. A lie, furthermore, that courageous U.S. diplomacy helped to expose in the first place. This falsification has already gone on long enough and has been justified for reasons of state. It is, among other things, precisely "for reasons of state," in other words for the clear and vital announcement that we can't be bought or intimidated, that April 24, 2009, should become remembered as the date when we affirmed the truth and accepted, as truth-telling does, all the consequences.


Christopher Hitchens is a columnist for Vanity Fair and the Roger S. Mertz media fellow at the Hoover Institution.

Yale University Press & Freedom of Expression

Christopher Hitchen’s latest article for Slate entitled, “Why did Yale University Press remove images of Mohammad from a book about Danish Cartoons?’ is a well reasoned piece that points out some ominous facts that if left to run their course, will result in not only the watering down of the medias effectiveness, but further the erosion of free speech and open inquiry.

Cast your mind back to 2005 and the controversy surrounding the Danish newspaper Jylland Portem that hosted a competition for cartoons depicting the prophet Mohammad. This caused a media shit storm that reverberated around the world, consequently resulting in the deaths of at least one hundred people.

I thought this particular issue had been laid to rest, but recent events have placed it firmed back onto the political agenda. Yale University Press has decided to publish a book called “The cartoons that shook the world” by Danish –born Jytte Klausen, who is professor of politics at Brandeis University. It tells the story of the horrid and preplanned campaign of “protest” and boycott that was orchestrated in the closing months of that year. The publication will see the removal of the twelve original caricatures that caused the initial hysteria. On one hand, this could be seen as expedient maneuver considering the related murders and threats carried out by Muslim extremists; on the other hand, a question has to be asked:

How far can the religious push this kind of censorship, and where will it end?

We can already hear Mullahs in the West shouting from their minaret tops for the banning of innocuous children’s fairy tales like “The Tree Little Pigs” and nonsensically lambasting fictitious television character like Miss Piggy. Laughably, one of the twenty centuries most revered novels, George Orwell’s profound and powerful “Animal Farm” has been banned from Muslim curriculums because of the central character is a pig.

The decision taken by Yale University is a momentous blow to all who believe that free speech is necessary and healthy within a functioning modern society. As Hitchens states, “According to the Yale logic, violence could result from the showing of the images-and not only that, but it would be those who displayed the images who were directly responsible for that violence.” This kind of logic creates all kind of problems and complexities. In theory an individual or group could be seen as the aggressor and perpetrator when in actual fact, they were upholding their right to freedom of expression.

During the first calamitous episode in 2005, those vehemently against the cartoons exclaimed that they would result in the “instigation” of violence. As Hitchens points out, “If you instigate something, it means that you wish and intend it to happen. If it’s a riot, then by instigating it, you have yourself colluded in it.”

The ramifications of this type of misinformation prove to be fatal, as the religious continue on their sadistic and sectarian crusade, against rationality and secularism. This particular masochistic bending of the rules by the religious can not go on if we are to maintain a level of decency and modernity in our world. Media outlets and the population writ large must have the confidence to stand up to these socio-religious bully boy tactics.

Sam Harris, one of the spearheads within the so called, “New Atheist Movement” postulates that religion should not be given such an elevated position within society, as it is merely a belief system, on a par with political allegiance. By this assumption, religion is given an artificial position within our society; one that can and should be challenged.

Hitchens surmises about the possibility of his own life being threatened or put in danger by his high profile polemics. He imperiously states, “Who’s to say a homicidal theocrat won’t decide to be offended now. I deny absolutely that I will have instigated him to do so, and I state in advance that he is directly and solely responsible for any blood that is on his hands.”

I take my hat off to Mr. Hitchens, and feel like him, that it is time for the media and people to stop sound biting democracy, and face facts that there is an encroaching beast at work - organized religion, that is not content to keep its views private; but insidiously attempts to force them upon others.

One would think that the religious would be overjoyed with the fact that they have uncovered the truth and discovered the dark and wondrous secrets of life to which, the rest of us are ignorant, but this is not the case. The religious with their tele-evanjelist conmen and their apocalyptic Mullahs continue to peddle fear, lies and damnation to the credulous, playing on peoples’ innate fear of death, and need for simple answers to life’s difficult questions.

A lot of blood has been split in attaining things that we now take for granted, such as free speech, which has undoubtedly accelerated our development as a race, and enhanced the lives of millions of citizens. It’s important to remember these undeniable facts, and not let the zealots dilute the effectiveness of progress made.

The monotheisms written as they were, by men sitting round iron-age campfires, have little relevance today and their majestic mutterings now look frail under the microscope of modern science and philosophy. These ‘great’ religions were probably our first attempt at understanding the big questions in life, of which some still baffle people today; but the point is that out first attempt at philosophy, has now been overshadowed and overtaken by sober, rational inquiry.

Evidence and facts, have felt their way slowly to the mainstream, and there they will stay.

The Yale University happenings are not the way forward for a democratic society and set a macabre example to all those who want to further their own fraudulent agendas. As Hitchens concludes, “What a cause of shame that the campus of Nation Hale should have pre-emptively run up the white flag and then cringingly taken the blood guilt of potential assassins and tyrants upon itself.”

I will conclude by saying that we all have the right to free expression in any form, and Yale University Press has provided a copybook example of what can happen when rationality is pushed a side in favour of a capitulation to the demands of opportunistic dogmatists.

Mike

Blasphemy law a return to middle ages - Dawkins

ALISON HEALY

THE NEW blasphemy law will send Ireland back to the middle ages, and is wretched, backward and uncivilised, Prof Richard Dawkins has said.

The scientist and critic of religion has lent his support to a campaign to repeal the law, introduced by Atheist Ireland, a group set up last December, arising from an online discussion forum. The law, which makes the publication or utterance of blasphemous matter a crime punishable by a €25,000 fine, passed through the Oireachtas last week.

In a message read out at Atheist Ireland’s first agm on Saturday, Prof Dawkins said: “One of the world’s most beautiful and best-loved countries, Ireland has recently become one of the most respected as well: dynamic, go-ahead, modern, civilised – a green and pleasant silicon valley. This preposterous blasphemy law puts all that respect at risk.” He said it would be too kind to call the law a ridiculous anachronism.

“It is a wretched, backward, uncivilised regression to the middle ages. Who was the bright spark who thought to besmirch the revered name of Ireland by proposing anything so stupid?”

Messages of support for the campaign were also received from the creators of Father Ted Graham Linehan and Arthur Matthews, and the European Humanist Federation. The federation, which represents 42 organisations in 19 countries, said it was “appalled” at the new law and it was “a seriously retrograde step”.

At the agm, Atheist Ireland members voted to test the new law by publishing a blasphemous statement, deliberately designed to cause offence. The statement will be finalised in the coming days.

Atheist Ireland’s chairman Michael Nugent said the group wanted to highlight the ridiculousness of the law. Labour Senator and barrister Ivana Bacik told the meeting that an amendment provides for a review of the law within five years. “There’s a great potential to have this very much altered if not removed altogether,” she said. The new law invited people to make complaints to gardaí and would result in “a huge amount” of wasted Garda time, she said.

“So for lots of reasons I think it’s going to be highly problematic . . . and it’s bad lawmaking if nothing else.”

Ms Bacik said the establishment of Atheist Ireland was “long overdue”. More than 150 people attended the meeting in Dublin and the group ran out of membership application forms. “I think it’s also good to see an organisation that has the word atheist in the title because for a long time many of us were in the closet,” she said.

“It’s not fashionable or popular to declare oneself to be an atheist. There are many people in Ireland who would like to describe themselves as atheists and I’m one of them. I think I may be the only self-confessed or card-carrying atheist in the Oireachtas.”

She said there should be space for atheists, agnostics and believers in organised religions. “And that’s the nature, to me, of a pluralist and tolerant and democratic republic, a country in which there is space for all of us, and in which no body’s belief elevates them to any particular position.”

The meeting agreed to campaign for the removal of all references to gods from the Constitution and for a secular education system. Ms Bacik said the education system, particularly at primary level, was “built on sectarian lines. It is a fundamentally sectarian system in which in our equal status legislation, schools are entitled to give priority to children of a particular religion”.

The group also launched a website www.countmeout.ie which provides information on how to formally leave the Catholic Church.

Atheist Ireland believes that many lapsed Catholics, agnostics and atheists are counted in the church’s membership and claims that these figures are used by the church to justify its continued involvement in education.

Atheist Ireland will also encourage people to read the Bible. Mr Nugent said an objective reading of the Bible was one of the strongest arguments for rejecting the idea of gods as intervening creators or moral guides.

Dick Spicer of the Humanist Association of Ireland welcomed the formation of the new group and said it illustrated the changes that had taken place in Irish society. “It’s a sign of how far we’ve come in Ireland, so take hope for the future. This society does move and it does move forward, more so, I think, than we appreciate.”

Uighur Resentment at Beijing's Rule

By Michael Dillon
Historian on Islam in China

The violence in Xinjiang has not occurred completely out of the blue.

Despite economic development, life for some Uighurs is said to be harder
Its root cause is ethnic tension between the Turkic Muslim Uighurs and the Han Chinese. It can be traced back for decades, and even to the conquest of what is now called Xinjiang by the Manchu Qing dynasty in the 18th Century.
In the 1940s there was an independent Eastern Turkestan Republic in part of Xinjiang, and many Uighurs feel that this is their birthright.
Instead, they became part of the People's Republic of China in 1949, and Xinjiang was declared one of China's autonomous regions, in deference to the fact that the majority of the population at the time was Uighur.
This autonomy is not genuine, and - although Xinjiang today has a Uighur governor - the person who wields real power is the regional secretary general of the Chinese Communist Party, Wang Lequan, who is a Han Chinese.
Inward migration
Under the rule of the Communist Party, there has been considerable economic development, but life has been made more difficult for the Uighurs over the past 20-30 years by the migration of many young and technically-qualified Han Chinese from the eastern provinces.
These new migrants are far more proficient in the Chinese language than all but a few Uighurs, and tend to be appointed to the best jobs.
Not surprisingly, this has created deep-seated resentment among the Uighurs, who view the migration of Han into Xinjiang as a plot by the government to dilute them, undermine their culture and prevent any serious resistance to Beijing's control.
More recently, young Uighurs have been encouraged to leave Xinjiang to find work in the rest of China, a process that had already been underway informally for some years.

There was particular concern at government pressure to encourage young Uighur women to move to other parts of China in search of employment - stoking fears they might end up working in bars or nightclubs or even in prostitution, without the protection of family or community.
Islam is an integral part of the life and the identity of the Uighurs of Xinjiang, and one of their major grievances against the Chinese government is the level of restriction imposed on their religious practices.
There are far fewer mosques in Xinjiang than there were before 1949, and they are subject to severe restrictions.
Children under the age of 18 are not permitted to worship in the mosques, and neither are Communist Party officials or the government.
Madrasas - religious schools - are also strictly controlled.


Other Islamic institutions that were once a central part of religious life in Xinjiang have been banned, including many of the Sufi brotherhoods, which are based at the tombs of their founders and provided many welfare and other services to their members.
All religions in China are subject to control by the State Administration for Religious Affairs, but the restrictions on Islam among the Uighurs are far harsher than against most other groups, including the Hui who are also Muslims but are Chinese speakers.
This severity is a result of the association between Muslim groups and the independence movement in Xinjiang, a movement that is absolute anathema to Beijing.
There are groups within Xinjiang that support the idea of independence, but they are not allowed to do so openly because "splitting the motherland" is viewed as treason.
During the 1990s - after the collapse of the Soviet Union and the emergence of independent Muslim states in Central Asia - there was an upsurge in open support for these "separatist" groups, culminating in huge demonstrations in the city of Ghulja in 1995 and 1997.
Beijing suppressed these demonstrations with considerable force, and activists were either forced out of Xinjiang into Central Asia and as far away as Pakistan or were obliged to go underground.
'Climate of fear'
Severe repression since the launch of a "Strike Hard" campaign in 1996 has included harsher controls on religious activity, restrictions on movement and the denial of passports and the detention of individuals suspected of support for separatists and members of their families.
This has created a climate of fear and a great deal of resentment towards the authorities and the Han Chinese.
It is surprising that this resentment has not erupted into public anger and demonstrations before now, but that is a measure of the tightness of control that Beijing has been able to exercise over Xinjiang.
There are a number of emigre Uighur organisations in Europe and the United States; in most cases they advocate genuine autonomy for the region.
In the past Beijing has also blamed an Eastern Turkestan Islamic Movement for causing unrest, although there is no evidence that this ever existed in Xinjiang.
The authorities in Beijing are unable to accept that their own policies in Xinjiang might be the cause of the conflict, and seek to blame outsiders for inciting the violence - as they do in the case of the Dalai Lama and Tibet.
Even if Uighur emigre organisations wished to provoke unrest, it would be difficult for them to do so, and there are, in any case, sufficient local reasons for unrest without the need for external intervention.

In the Name of Justice (2007)

Contents:

**** Disc One ****
1.1 THE MEXICANS
- Mexico - a country rich in oil resources but heavily influenced by the policies and politics of its near neighbour, the USA. In a country dominated by the thought that the revolution is only half over, is Mexico a potential Iran on American doorsteps?

1.2 STREET OF JOY
- John Pilger investigates how product marketing techniques used in advertising are applied to politics, specifically the US Presidential campaign in the mid- 1970s. In doing so he uncovers the spin doctors at work and witnesses how they can make less-than deserving presidential candidates into frontrunners through reworking their public image.

1.3 PYRAMID LAKE IS DYING
- Due to the damming and changing of the water flow from two lakes in the Nevada desert to accommodate white settlers, the Pyramid Lake Paiute reservation is on the verge of extinction. With Lake Winemucca already dead and Pyramid Lake dying, the Paiutes have to resort to legal remedies to survive.

**** Disc Two ****
2.1 A FARAWAY COUNTRY
- John Pilger investigates the Czech Underground and interviews members of the group known as the Charter 77 Movement. Outlawed by the then-incumbent Government's oppressive regime, the Charter 77 activists were denounced as traitors and renegades.

2.2 DO YOU REMEMBER VIETNAM?
- John Pilger was one of the last journalists to leave Vietnam at the end of the war. Three years later, he returned to examine the state of the country under the new regime.

2.3 VIETNAM: THE LAST BATTLE
- Nearly twenty years after making his "Do You remember Vietnam?" documentary, and with the embargoes on that country lifted by President Clinton, Pilger returned to Vietnam to review those two decades. He investigates the scandal of cheap labour and the Hollywood-isation of the war.

**** Disc Three ****
3.1 THE TRUTH GAME
- An examination of the propaganda and policy surrounding the nuclear arms race - from the initial nuclear detonations over Japan to the stockpiling of arms by world superpowers. It also looks at the way "official truth" is used to condition the public against the real facts of a nuclear war.

3.2 JAPAN BEHIND THE MASK
- Denied a sense of nationalism since World War Two, Japanese society slowly re-established itself as a 'corporate society'. This documentary reports on the contrast between the popular image and stereotypes of Japan and the actuality of the lives of ordinary people who do not fit the image.

3.3 APARTHEID DID NOT DIE
- Banned in the sixties by South Africa's oppressive apartheid regime, John Pilger returns to the country to examine the benefits of democracy. He interviews Nelson Mandela and tries to uncover to what extent the black majority has benefited under the new regime.

**** Disc Four ****
4.1 THE LAST DREAM: HEROES UNSUNG
- First of a three-part documentary on the history of Australia's development over the last two centuries. This first show examines the plight of the Aborigines whose land was stolen by British settlers and who are still seeking justice.

4.2 THE LAST DREAM: SECRETS
- An investigation into the massive racial inequalities in the Australian society between the native Aborigines and the whites. It also examines the massacre of thousands of its indigenous peoples.

4.3 THE LAST DREAM: OTHER PEOPLE'S WARS
- This third and last part looks at the relationship Australians have with war, often engaging in conflicts that pose no threat to their country.

ABOUT JOHN PILGER:
John Pilger is a well-known journalist (twice named British journalist of the year and recipient of UN Media Peace Prize) whose stories - whether it's in the form of documentaries, books or articles - are always told from the perspective of the poor and suffering people of the world. He brings up issues that mainstream media won't even touch. His works are very serious, there is nothing "conspiratorial" about them, and if you have not yet read or seen anything by him, now is a great opportunity.

Mike

Relative Calm Returns to City of Angels

The Army have taken control of Bangkok once again after the United Front for Democracy against Dictatorship (UDD) leaders called off their rally at 11am yesterday.

Many in the capital have hailed the army as their new saviours after enduring 48 hours of anarchy on the streets.

A state of emergency was called 24 hours ago and after pitched battles the 'Red Shirts' leaders called off the protests vowing to re-organise and re-group at the later date.

Nearly 10,000 soldiers were sent from Bangkok, Prachin Buri, Kanchanaburi and Lop Buri to quell the riots and end the UDD protests with tanks on the streets of the capital for the secone time in as many years.

Mike

'Mobocracy' and the Land of Smiles

"I believe the darkest days in Thailand's history are yet to come, as we see no swift solution to ongoing divisiveness," said Prinn Panitchpakdi, an Asia-Pacific analyst.

Today is the Thai New Year, Songkran. For the uninitiated, it is a wonderful celebration that marks the end of the dry season and heralds the start of the wet season with much frivolity. Whole communities take to the streets and propel water by whatever means possible at anything that comes within their visual range. Overloaded pick up trucks stacked with barrels of water drive the streets soaking anyone and everyone with indiscriminate, non-confrontational splashes of new year cheer.

These are the scenes that I have witnessed today in Phuket but the same can not be said of Bangkok. News bulletins are beaming in to my computer screen showing a violence and escalating anarchy on the street of the kingdom's capital. The 'Red Shirts' as they are colloquially know, have been part of highly organised and intricate anti-government campaign calling for the current government to step down. Their campaign has been thrusted forward in recent months and one can't help feeling that an attempted revolution is not far away. If this were to occur, it would be Thailand's nineteenth revolution in sixty years, and the fifth change in prime minister in four years. Political unrest and instability are becoming the norm for this country which is bad news for the fragile economy and wafer thin infrastructure.

Thailand's immediate future will depend on the ability of the Thai army to hold their nerve in the face of petrol bombs and extreme violence. The army have been firing off rounds from M16 assault weapons over the heads of riotous protesters today pushing tensions to a dangerous cliff edge.

The red shirts vitriol is being massaged by the ousted former prime minster Thaksin Shinawatra who is in exile as a result of a corruption conviction he recieved in 2008. Mr Shinawatra has been giving tele-conferences to crowds of thousands on the street via video links from Dubai, stoking the flames with incendiary language and imagery.

The next few days are critical and its impossible to predict what will happen with a very real possibility of more bloodshed or worse.

Mike

Dissidents or Dissenters?

Thought I would post this recent Christopher Hitchen's excerpt as it makes typically engaging reading on Northern Ireland.

From: Terrorists, Dissidents, and Copy Editors
Why it matters how the media describe killers in Iraq and Ireland.
By Christopher Hitchens


'Until recently, the same newspaper(The New York Times) used to employ a description of the Provisional Irish Republican Army in Northern Ireland that was slightly less misleading and also somewhat more amusing. Aware of the fact that its readers knew that there were two discrepant kinds of Christianity practiced in the province, the New York Times would do its job of being strictly informative by characterizing the IRA as "overwhelmingly Catholic." One could see what the editors were vainly trying to do—namely, to suggest that very few Ulster Protestants indeed were succumbing to the temptation to enlist in the ranks of the IRA—but the resulting image was nonetheless risible, as if someone encountering a gunman of the IRA would be first and foremost overwhelmed by his Catholicism. (Come to think of it, where was Bill Donohue of the Catholic League when this slander was being promulgated? He usually kindles into flame at much less provocation.)

But now something really depressing has happened and is spreading like weed across the media. Since the Good Friday agreement that committed the IRA to disarmament and the Republican movement to electoral politics, two small, ultraviolent nationalist factions have sworn to continue the armed struggle. In the past week, they have randomly slain members of the army and police. And it has been agreed, apparently without a discussion or an argument, to refer to these gruesome elements as dissidents.

I have consulted the final court of appeal on this, in the form of the Oxford English Dictionary, and the ruling is pretty final. All the origins of the term lie in expressions of argument and opinion, and of "dissent" from ruling systems or ideologies. There is a solitary and obscure reference, from a report in the London Times of 1955, to an obscure Vietnamese sect described as "dissident" and also as launching attacks on local Vietnamese army positions, but otherwise all the sources and authorities are unanimous: The term describes only attitudes and not actions, and it is most famously associated with the intellectual opposition to Soviet totalitarianism. (Prior to that usage, it was principally applied to those religious people of conscience who refused allegiance to the established Catholic and Episcopalian churches, which ironically would perhaps qualify the word dissident as being "overwhelmingly Protestant.")

Thanks for the original link K.

Mike

Could The Leaders Of Sinn Fein Be Doing More?-Soothing Words Are Not Always Enough

With senior leader of Sinn Fein condemning the recent murders in Northern Ireland and the insistence that the Republican movement pass on any information regarding the same, people have heralded halcyon times in Republican openness.

Is this really the case, or are certain factors not being revealed?

The likelihood of Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness knowing about the timing of these killings is very doubtful, but there is little doubt that the senior figures in Sinn Fein must know who the perpetrators are.

These murders where carried out in a professional, militaristic fashion, leaving little evidence or trace of identification, and is therefore unlikely to be the work of a fanatical teenager.

Those responsible fired at the victims from a distance and then finished them off from point blank range as they lay dying. This levelheadedness, in the face of such a crime points towards a more mature killer, perhaps one with many years experience.

Thus, with many members of the PIRA leaving after the ceasefire, disgusted by the democratic path taken by SinnFein, it is possible that these disaffected individuals were involved in the recent murders.

It stands beyond reasonable doubt that Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness know who jumped off the ship ten years ago, and the names of these individuals should be presented to the authorities.

Northern Ireland is such a small place and the numbers involved in terrorist activities are so low, therefore individuals who left the organisation have to be compiled, profiled and handed over to the police.

If this was carried out, we really would be witnessing a new age of transparent Republicanism.

Pikey

Dangerous Times

Eve Merriam said, "I dream of giving birth to a child who will ask, "Mother, what was war?"

These sentiments are difficult to read after the events of the last few days in Northern Ireland. In the last decade the majority have tossed aside the bondage of conflict, adapting to life in a peaceful land, albeit with tentative steps. Few wish to turn back their clocks to the bygone days of retribution, division and political paranoia, but three killings in as many days shows deepening cracks in the countries socio-political landscape.

At this point no group has taken responsibility for the killings, but 'The Real IRA' are strongly suspected of involvement. Republican leaders such as Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness have called for Nationalist/Republicans to pass on information to the police, an act traditionally held in disdain during 'The troubles,' and seen by many as acquiescing to British occupation. This eventuality seemed unthinkable a few years ago, and stands in testament to how far the political process has come, but is the house of cards going to stand up to the current storm?

These atrocities have a real danger of stoking old flames and hatreds that need little encouraging to ignite into something perilous for the future of the country. Loyalist paramilitary leaders called for calm in communities as graffiti calling for revenge was seen in various parts of the province.

What the future holds remains to be seen. The stability of the province stands on a precarious knife edge, one that people over the age of twenty will remember all too well, for they were the dark days of the countries history.

People now squint at the news in disbelief at the current situation, hoping and praying that history does not repeat itself.

Only time will tell.

Pikey

Good Old New Labour

As the march towards Labour's police states continues to pick up pace in Britain, the public are left in a state of paralysis by what is happening on their fair shores. Lord Haysham called it an 'electoral dictatorship' others have more caustic words echoing around in their psyche.

Almost 60 new powers contained in more than 25 Acts of Parliament have whittled away at freedoms and broken pledges set out in the Human Rights Act and Magna Carta, as a result of laws introduced by Labour since they came to power in 1997.

The Convention on Modern Liberty recent dossier, rightfully criticises draconian police powers to detain terror suspects for 28 days without charge, new stop-and-search powers handed to police (allowing them to stop people without reason at airports and other designated areas), and restrictions on the right of peaceful protest.


When the fevered rhetoric dies down and the dust begins to settle on the pages of the 'objective' broadsheets, we can take time to breath and reassess what has become of Britain, and more frighteningly, where it is headed.

It is the first time such a picture of the erosion of rights under Labour has been published, exercising their right to free speech and providing the government with a clear and comprehensive depiction of how Britain is being run.

Liberty's voice is not alone in the wilderness, it is one shared by many disenfranchised and disillusioned people throughout the land, and surely can't be ignored. A solid platform for dissent and oganisation has been built and with grotesque despoliation a daily occurrence, the growth should be rapid.

With the proliferation of surveillance technology, new laws allowing individuals to be electronically tagged, the legal interception of letters, emails and phone calls, one could be forgiven for mistaking our 'free' society for that of North Korea or China. But no, these latest pearls of wisdom come from Whitehall, an institution rapidly losing face and credibility.

The question many are asking is, 'Where is it all going to end?' Huxleyian and Orwellian images and language resonate in one's mind, and present a very real and present danger for society.

A more pressing question for one to forward could be, 'What can be done to stop it?'

Direct action with violence would provide an opportunity for the government and would see the police state close in further, using fear through the media to validate their means.

It has taken economic quandary to waken people from their docu-soap slumber, and now is the time for free thinking and well informed citizens to educate themselves in the hypocrisy, and organise.

The battle of state vs people has been set in motion, for who will win the war, the jury is out. The power lies with the people and the time is right for action

Pikey